Treating Babies Differently by Gender

This study should be fascinating, probably for its poor research design, invalid extrapolation, poor reasoning and misuse of words that mean one thing to imply they mean something else. From what we can make out, the researcher surveyed a group of parents and found that 79% said they wanted their children to be free of limiting gender stereotypes and 92% said they agreed it was important to treat girls and boys equally in their early years. Mmm, well most parents want the best for their children and if the wording of questions makes them sound like that’s what it’s about, most parents would tend to answer “yes”. Anyway, from this startling finding the researcher concluded that it’s ‘crucial’ we don’t treat baby girls differently from baby boys because that will cause the boys to be domestic violence perpetrators and will cause people generally to think men make better leaders. And so forth.

It is surprising that feminist academics continue to ignore the evidence that gender is largely genetic. We have known quite a few educated parents who were careful not to use blue or pink or gender-specific toys or activities. Guess what? As soon as they were old enough to actively show their interest in one thing or another, most of the boys just wanted such things as toy trucks, weapons and things to dismantle while most of the girls just wanted such things as dolls, flowery things and personal embellishments, and neither showed much interest in the other’s preferences.

Incidentally, it seems to be common practice by the feminist researchers to spread their claimed findings and extrapolations through news media before actually publishing their papers. This cleverly prevents readers from being able to check the actual research to see if the news release information was justified. It’s only possible of course because of journalists’ complicity.

15 Responses to “Treating Babies Differently by Gender”

Have you wondered WHY – there is a huge push to force GENDER issues on society?

Your correct Gender has nothing to do with Sex – reproductive organs.

GENDER is ALL ABOUT CONTROL.

Fathers are being deliberately removed from Children’s lives….we all know this……but WHY?

We are all blessed with Feminine and masculine GENDER qualities – both Man and Woman have a Right Brain and left BRAIN – one side uses Emotion to make decisions and the other side uses logic and reason…..guess which is masculine and which is feminine?

Women are more Right brain Dominated with Emotion – while men are more Left Brain dominated by Logic and Reason

Now you know why we always see things differently as man and woman.

Fathers are also PROTECTORS, they give stability, and teach children how to look after themselves.

If we have an agenda to create VICTIMS, VULNERABLE children who become Vulnerable Adults – who then NEED the care of Government – then we need to remove FATHERS, the protectors, and this is happening as we have all seen.

So where does GENDER come into this? If those in control create multiple GENDERS – many Genders as we are seeing, then all of a sudden over time – we have NO Gender identifiers that define the difference between what is a Man and what is a woman.

What has NO GENDER?

WHAT has NO FREE WILL, what has NO ability to stand up for itself because all masculinity has been removed?

Have you noticed how many of these “MALES” who engage in Gender re-assignment are more feminine than masculine in the first place.

Fair enough. We’re guilty of using the terms sex and gender somewhat interchangeably, and we’re not sure that use of the term gender is inappropriate in what this post addresses. Replacing the word gender with sex, for example in the title, would give rise to unfortunate ambiguity of meaning because the word sex has several major meanings. We’re interested in exactly why some people think it matters so much unless one definitely wants to refer only to the chromosomes and sexual organs, or only to one’s behaviour, self-identity etc.

We’re interested also in people’s thoughts about the content of the post.

I think the word gender was the correct choice. We are talking about socialization not their biological differences.

Try all you like you won’t stop a girl being a tomboy if that’s what she wants to do, I have one.

There is an element of parental direction and an element of child election.

As a child I learned at my request to knit with needles, because my curious brain wanted to know how that worked, and once I got that sorted I played with a soccer ball, because I had seen George Best get past three defenders and score a goal.

My parents had a range of compliance, both regarding gender and curiosity. Getting one of Dad’s shovels and digging in the sandpit to see if you could get to the other side of the world, wasn’t permitted, but sitting on Mum’s knee having a go with her new knitting machine, I was right into that.

I am grateful that my parents found my curiosity entertaining.

I see there is a comment about male and female brains. I read a British study perhaps ten years ago, that identified a female brain, a female/male brain, a male/female brain and a male brain.

Based on that I’m not sure you immediately know what as a parent you are dealing with.

I’ve read some of the recent thinking that gender is totally reinforced and not a natural development – but I can remember as a kid looking at those girls, and thinking – glad I’m not one of them, they’re just silly.

The text below the YouTube video was horrific. Every time I learn a little bit more about poor little David Reimer, I am horrified again. I had never heard the part about the circumcision being unnecessary in any case! Then that rolling on through a series of disasters, to his suicide 32 years later. (Written by someone with a slightly blacker sense of humour even than me Written by CyanideMaiden). And the way it took 15 or 20 years for Professor Milton Diamond to expose the truth. How many other children were mangled in that time, due to Money’s arrogance and pride? I have seen guesses that it is in the low thousands?

The comment about the missus studying psychology reminded me of a scary experience I had as a student. My girlfriend had the flu and asked me to go to her psychology class and take notes for her. I did and it was all about operant conditioning. I enjoyed looking around a class fairly different to my own. I obediently scratched it all down. After the lecture, I went to my classes. In the back of my head, it kept rattling around that it was all about getting the most manipulative effect, for the minimum cost or investment.

The more I thought about that, in human terms, the more unsettled, even scared I got. You couldn’t get a colder analysis of behaviour. It hung over me, getting slowly and steadily worse through the day.
But then I realised that of all the women I knew, she was the least manipulative person that I knew.
So when I got home, I was able to give her her notes with a smile.

But that fear of cold, heartless manipulation never did go away. And it has come back on several occasions, with teeth, before leaving again. (But I know know that if I choose to turn it on, I can be a pretty bad manipulator myself. I try to restrain myself, as I am not proud of that.)
Watched rd pll ystrd. Vg. Btr thn vg. rcmmndd
Go carefully out there…….

Thankfully stupidity is easily debunked.
Actually the term intellectual corruption may be more appropriate.
After all the lead article was created by
“The psychologist and author, best known as the wife of Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, has teamed up with domestic violence advocacy group Our Watch.”
Titled
“Aussie leads gender equality campaign for babies and toddlers”
What campaign?
Is there some weird plan for genetic engineering of children?
Or post birth surgeries?
No.
The article is just typical man hating sexual bigotry.
For example.
“These notions embolden the stereotype that men make better leaders due to being more decisive and ration. This view is supported by one in five Australians.”
It does not say.
These notions embolden the stereotype that women make better caregivers of children due to being more loving and caring. This view is supported by all family court judges.
Worse than that.
“The startling research suggests children learn “gender-role” behaviour that could lead to domestic violence by the age of two.”
Evidence or proof?
Nope, just a suggestion plucked from a pie in the sky.
We could of course site the Dunedin study.
This treating female babies as princesses gives them a false sense of entitlement to be total bitches later in life with females being domestically violent at nearly twice the rate of males.
IE we should learn from our success with boys and bring all girls up to be like boys.
The community will be safer as a result.
They will therefore also become rubbish truck operators at the same rates.

We all know female psychologists are donkey deep with both hands in the family court cooky jar.
No surprise we get this feminist, one sided, predetermined outcomes social research.

But what happens when people do real science?
You can’t change some things.
Genetics is one of those things.
Inherently to that.
Gender is another.

Interesting turn of events.
In order starting from most important.
Dog, Girl, Boy.
Then the open ended no, yes, no.
Made compliant.
Rejected. Nothing to see here.
Got backup. Made compliant.
Oh ok then. Arrest them.
Released accused.

Further investigation needed.

What’s the pitfall?
Obviously the father has consented to the operation.
So how can anybody be charged if a guardian gave consent?
Is operating on someone without good reason a crime?
Nose jobs etc?

As for the lead article.
No mention of this version of treating boys and girls differently.
Eventually in history books, this non medical reasons amputation of male sexual organs will be in the barbaric practices section.
Not as bad as female circumcision as sexual enjoyment is only reduced for the male.
But the same as if the labia were cut off.
Feminists would be bashing down parliaments door if it was legal to do that.

Interesting indeed DJ Ward @14. I suspect that one of the reasons this circumcision is being prosecuted is that it was performed poorly, resulting in bleeding and ongoing difficulties for the boy, not because circumcision is being treated as assault per se.

Interesting too that the authorities in this case have responded on the basis of a mother’s complaint about what the father brought about during an access visit. If the gender roles were reversed and a father complained about the mother’s parenting decision, he would likely be treated as a ‘patriarchal power and control’ abuser and his access likely reduced or stopped. If he joined with an organisation to support his complaints he would likely be labelled a disgruntled father, a male activist and subjected to phone tapping and surveillance by police and a ‘protection order’ by the Family Court disallowing the man from contributing to further internet posts about his concerns.

In NZ, the Ministry of Education will readily enroll children into schools according to a separated mother’s wishes and will allow a mother to provide home schooling with enrollment in the Correspondence School, without any reference to or interest in the father’s wishes, but will exercise more caution and check with the mother if a separated father attempts anything similar.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.